I’m sure that you are aware of the fact that floats representation in any programming language is limited by the precision of the internal binary representations. In other words, you can never have an exact float representation – there will always be some precision associated with the float you are working with. The simplest example is the difference in precision between the float and double types in C.

Suppose I have the following code fragment:
[C] if ( result.score >= input->raw_cut_off ) [/C]

Both result.score and input->raw_cut_off are of type float, and can have positive and negative values. When compared with the greater than or equal ( >= ) operator, it is not always that condition is true – for the precision reasons shortly mentioned above.

As I already said, there is no precision specification for equality operators in C. But it is quite simple to “invent” precision specification; e.g. if I wanted to test for equality only, I could write
[C] if ( fabsf( result.score – input->raw_cut_off ) < 0.000001 )[/C] In this example, I'm effectively asking for 6-digit precision for the equality comparison of floating-point values. Note, that if you replace that 0.000001 with the actual precision limit of the floating type you are using, you will be "exactly" comparing floating-point numbers - up to that type's precision, of course .

The first-most example with the >= operator can be rewritten as
[C] if ( result.score > ( input->raw_cut_off – precision) ) [/C]
where precision is exactly what it is named, e.g. precision = 0.000001.

Sources used:

• comment by Randy A. Ynchausti
• scientific programming

and put your “floatbox” inside a container (such as DIV), you will actually see 200px of the left margin instead of the expected 100px. This problem is known as “IE margin-doubling bug”.

In this post I collected solutions you can use to avoid this problem. The solution I’d recommend is at the end.

The first solution is to apply some minimal height to the container:

This method is described in more details here , and even better here.

Another one is to apply position:relative, this is quite an old solution, described here (there are also other fixes for the problem there, too; link returned error at the time of writing, might be a temporal problem – if not, please remind me to remove it).

Another solution is to wrap the element in another one, and apply float to that another. Removing float from the element helps avoid the trouble. This fix found here. There are lots of examples there, too.

You can also set display:inline, as described in this solution. I would recommend using this one as the most clean and compatible. To apply it to our example at the beginning, we should write the following CSS code: